Friday, July 8, 2016

Michael T. Klare — The United States and NATO Are Preparing for a Major War With Russia


Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama's parting gift as POTUS to the world. 

What's happening is that the US is selling Russian "aggression" while setting it up and giving Russia the Hobson's choice of either letting NATO surround it or being drawn into a situation in Easter Ukraine where the US can claim that Russia is the aggressor.

What could go wrong with a strategy like that? Looks foolproof to the fools who put it together.

This is a piece of a plan that has long been in place and it not limited to Russia. To ensure global hegemony lasts indefinitely without any serious challenges, the US needs to install compliant neoliberal puppets in Russia and China and will stop at nothing to do so, even risking nuclear war. 

What's the rush? The US military realizes that they have a relatively short window of opportunity before Russia and China become so strong as to close the window. Since Russia and China have realized the trap they are arming up quickly.

Of course the US military knows it cannot win a land war in Eurasia against either Russia or China and certainly not against both, but it can create enough chaos to keep the US dominant. 

The gamble is that Russia will not respond with a nuclear attack in spite of Putin's warning that everything is on the table and that this time the US will not be left untouched by war.

The other gamble the US is taking is that is will unravel NATO as Europeans decide that yet another war in Europe is not a good idea.

On the other hand, with the EU coming apart and the EZ breaking down economically, the leadership may be thinking that a war is needed to keep it together.

6 comments:

Bob said...

How does the NATO buildup compared with US preparations to liberate Kuwait? In that engagement the US had around 540,000 soldiers. Now compare the state of the Iraqi military at that time, and the Russian military today.

The NATO buildup is also described as defensive, to deter an imaginary Russian attack. While there is an increased risk of "incidents", lets not blow these developments out of proportion.

Conclusion: Hyperbolic Chicken Little article.

Tom Hickey said...

How does the NATO buildup compared with US preparations to liberate Kuwait? In that engagement the US had around 540,000 soldiers. Now compare the state of the Iraqi military at that time, and the Russian military today.

The NATO buildup is also described as defensive, to deter an imaginary Russian attack. While there is an increased risk of "incidents", lets not blow these developments out of proportion.

Conclusion: Hyperbolic Chicken Little article.


If Nato would begin ramping up like the preparation to invade Iraq, Russia would not be sitting around waiting for it.

The current strategy is to pressure Russia by surrounding it with missiles that can take out Russian nuclear deterrent, on one hand, and if possible, drawing Russian regular military into Eastern Ukraine to fire up Western populations about "Russian aggression."

The geostrategists don't want an all out war with Russia, which would result in huge devastation in Europe as well as Russia. Their objective is regime change in Russia and China, eliminating their militaries peacefully (as the US was doing after the collapse of the USSR), and breaking up Russia and China into smaller states that cannot take on anyone of significance. With the the US controls the world militarily for the foreseeable future, and with translational corporate totalitarians, neoliberal rules forever.

Hyperbolic Chicken Little article.

Clare is not given to writing hyperbole and he is not alone is his views.

All of this—the aggressive exercises, the NATO buildup, the added US troop deployments—reflects a new and dangerous strategic outlook in Washington. Whereas previously the strategic focus had been on terrorism and counterinsurgency, it has now shifted to conventional warfare among the major powers. “Today’s security environment is dramatically different than the one we’ve been engaged in for the last 25 years,” observed Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter on February 2, when unveiling the Pentagon’s $583 billion budget for fiscal year 2017. Until recently, he explained, American forces had largely been primed to defeat insurgent and irregular forces, such as the Taliban in Afghanistan. Now, however, the Pentagon was being readied for “a return to great-power competition,” including the possibility of all-out combat with “high-end enemies” like Russia and China.

That's the US Secretary of Defense talking, he who was aboard one of the warships testing China recently, personally sending a message the Chinese leadership that the US is ready to rumble.

Bob said...

The current strategy is to pressure Russia by surrounding it with missiles that can take out Russian nuclear deterrent, on one hand, and if possible, drawing Russian regular military into Eastern Ukraine to fire up Western populations about "Russian aggression."

Trying to circumvent MAD will likely end the world.
Russia toppling the Ukrainian regime would be bad PR, but it might have to be done. They're going to collapse eventually.

That's the US Secretary of Defense talking, he who was aboard one of the warships testing China recently, personally sending a message the Chinese leadership that the US is ready to rumble.

They are not ready to rumble. The debacles in the Middle East have demonstrated the limitations of the US military. American Exceptionalism is a wet dream that bears no resemblance to reality, which is multi-polar.

Russia could have been co-opted and neutralized during the Yeltsin years, and brought into the European fold. But the West lost their chance to extend and build upon goodwill. What is the likelihood of pro-US regime change in China or Russia? About the same change as pro-Russian or pro-Chinese regime change in America.

Clare is not given to writing hyperbole and he is not alone is his views.

Chicken Littles come in flocks. Strength in numbers, I suppose.

Bob said...

Brexit has thrown a wrench into Washington's plan for a New Cold War. Once Europeans begin to act in their own interests, NATO will be reduced to a rump whose only support will come from paranoid Eastern European regimes.

Ignacio said...

Bob Germany to deploy some troops to eastern Europe, Baltic states, accordign to last NATO meetings.

looks like we still are mere puppets of NATO/US-driven agenda.

So much stupid, hard to swallow.

Bob said...

Give it time. If the EU fails to become independent of Washington, nationalist governments might step up and regain their sovereignty. Some of them will be willing to trade with Russia.

An independent Europe is key to ending American cold war stupidity in the region.